On Mar 19, 2015 12:40 AM, "Scott Robison" <sc...@casaderobison.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 5:41 PM, bch <brad.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I tried this, and I see what you're talking about -- It's not clear to >> me it's an error (I'm not apologizing for anything that happened here, >> but I'd have to better understand the merge algorithm to know if this >> is logically sane). Its easy to see how this could be confusing >> though. I'll have to fiddle more to understand this. > > > Okay, here's what I have come up with. > > 1. It is not a bug. It is technically accurate, though confusing, because it doesn't allow you to easily "use original" or "use merge" because of the missing line. > > 2. The "problem" (in my expectation, not fossil) is one of context. I made a little test change to force at least one extra line of context at the end of the conflict block and that gives me what I was expecting. However, I can see where this "problem" could probably crop up with inadequate context at the beginning of the conflict instead of at the end, or that perhaps one extra line of context still wouldn't be enough, or could even be too much. > > The reality is that nothing can be perfect for 100% of all possible use cases, and in this particular case, I just got unlucky. The merge conflict information as given couldn't support a mechanical "pick one or the other" resolution (which was fine because this particular merge needed a thought out solution, not a mechanical resolution).
This is what I was leaning toward. > I'm inclined to just leave it alone and live with the reality. Sorry for yelling fire (or whatever). Thanks for filling a reasonable report - I think the next step is developing a *workflow* that illustrates what's going on: i.e.: select you edits, run a diff to see what the changes really are. One thing that struck me is that code references (i.e.: "last common ancestor") could stand to have their SHA1 identifier included in the header so I've got it for immediate reference. > SDR > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users >
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
